Abstract:The purpose of this research article is to draw researchers’ attention towards comparative study of, and for, translation(s) of translation and interpretation(s) of interpretation. This idea comes from the experience of crossing the various types of borders, such as physical, political, social, economic, post-colonial, etc. In other words, what happen to words, expressions, texts, translations, interpretations, etc. when they cross borders from one context, place, or state to another in time and space? Responding to this issue in terms of translation, one might say that some elements of the original text might lose their meanings, and others might also state that new implications would be given or attached to the translated text because of cultural differences. Accordingly, some elements of an identity have been lost, and other new ones have been acquired in time and space. This can be also seen and felt in a reader or traveler before and after navigating. The topic of this article will developed by making use of the various intellectual reflections of Octavio Paz, José Ortega y Gasset, J. Hillis Miller, Matthew Gumpert, Itamar Even-Zohar and Gideon Toury, in general, and Tomás Albaladejo’s notion of “Polyacroasis” and Said’s trop of “Traveling Theory,’ in particular. The implications and applications of the last two tropes will be combined and developed to draw scholars’ considerations towards a critical comparative approach to study the translation(s) of translation and interpretation(s) of interpretation, re-produced in time and space.Keywords: translation(s), interpretation(s), travelling theory, polyacroasis, lost, found